A Gun is a Tool, Marian

In my mind, guns are tools, and they can show themselves ,off with intricately crafted artwork also. On the tool side of it, my wife and I make it a point to maintain proficiency. We have the black rifles. We've hydro-dipped black rifles for some special looks. We own revolvers with the late 1800's design, as well as percussion and flintlock. I love the look of lever rifles, custom engravings, steel 1911s, and carved wood stocks that required hundreds of hours of chisels, files, and sanding.

I no longer hunt, and don't compete. I reload, and make it a point to know enough mechanics about the individual weapons to maintain them. We enjoy shooting in the deserts of the Rocky Mtn. area, and it's great to have some variety, including the polymers.
 
Shane's gun was a prop. However, Ladd was well known as a recreational shooter. So were most of the other movie types of the time.
"...It is a weapon..." Weapons are tools. They're one of the tools cops use. Even though most cops see them as just another heavy piece of kit they're required to haul around and rarely if ever actually use. The rest of it is just semantics.
 
I consider guns tools, but I also consider them much more...

OldMarksman, I see exactly what you're saying and I agree. No way I would carry a blued Colt 1911 for SD or on duty. Why? Not because it is not adequate, but because it has class and character. I carry a CZ P-07. Many others carry Glocks, or some other polymer concoction. I don't carry my soul-less polymer pistol because it is that much more reliable than some other, more classy pistols. I carry it because if I do have to use a weapon in SD, you can bet I won't be seeing that weapon for a very long time. I can replace a G19, or CZ P-07, for $450.00. That blued Hi-Power or Colt 1911? Not so much.

So yeah, I view my carry pistols much more like tools, though I do use them for recreation. Any wood and steel semi or revolver? Not a tool to me. Those are things of beauty.
 
...if I do have to use a weapon in SD, you can bet I won't be seeing that weapon for a very long time.
Click to expand...

This is the best reason I've seen yet for carrying a polymer. I've never considered that but it makes perfect sense.
 
I never noticed the front sight was missing....going to watch some clips real close and see if I can get a good look at his belt and holster.
Shane has always been my favorite western.
Gary

You are correct about that front sight...if it's there I can't make it out !
 
Last edited:
The old guns had a soul, something the alloy/polymer don't have. I lament that the new ones just don't have the look, but darn they work.
 
I don't know that I agree with this notion that today's polymer pistols aren't sexy. Just like there are different kinds of sexy when it comes to humans, there are also different kinds of sexy when it comes to guns. I happen to think my SP101 is pleasing to my eyes. There's also something about a blued revolver with just the right shade of wood grips that I find very pleasing. But I also find my M&P 2.0 to be very easy on my eyes. It has a style to it that makes it more than something I own purely for its effectiveness as a tool. Now....my G42.....that's purely a tool.
 
The thing that gets me is how so many polymer guns are just plain ugly. Why? They can make anything out of plastic in a mold pretty much instantly, and the price only changes by how much the molds need to be worked on, and how much polymer they use, so why the bizarre looking guns? IMHO, the best looking polymer guns are the CZ Sp-01's and the S&W M&P (V1, the new ones aren't as nice looking), followed by the Taurus 800 and the PT111 G2. Most of the rest are either...plain, or just plain awkward looking, and then there are the ones I just don't understand, like the Glocks. Not hideous, but plain to be sure. A little prettying up wouldn't hurt and it could be done for little cost and it would cause no compatibility with the older, uglier ones. The Glock is a beauty compared to a Hi-Point, or some of the other "humpbacked" striker guns.

I have currently, 7 polymer guns, 3 with hammers, 4 strikers. I will be selling a couple of the striker guns off, and never miss them, but the hammer guns I would miss, but I plan on keeping them until I get so old they have to go with the rest of my collection. If I had to prune it down to a select few, they would all be metal framed, hammer guns, like my Sig P220, Tanfoglio "Mossad" and "Combat Cohai", and my blued and SS revolvers. The polymer guns are basically like a power drill. I just replaced my old brushed one with a brushless one. I don't miss the old one at all. It still works, but the batteries are just ridiculously expensive, so off it went to a friend who wanted it and made an umbilical cord adapter for his identical one out of a battery case and doesn't mind a cord. The Canik Tp9v2 will soon be sold off. A great cheap gun, but it's ugly, and it's a striker, and it's polymer, and I don't really care about it. That money will go towards a Sig Stainless Elite, or a higher end CZ or Witness.
 
OldMarksman said:
The most functional of today's weapons for defensive carry are tools, and to me that's all they well ever be.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, and will add, IMHO, that it goes for weapons/firearms of any time in history. I go with this definition of a tool....

tool
to͞ol/
noun
noun: tool; plural noun: tools

1.
a device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function.

Being a tradesman all my life, I also believe firearms/guns are just tools of the trade, even when it comes to warfare. Calling them a "weapon" does not change what they are. Many folks want to personify firearms or make them more than what they are. Making them more attractive does not charge what they are either, even when they are depicted as an art form. In the past, hand tools like Stanley planes were highly detailed and almost an art form of their own......but still, they were working tools. They were also sometimes used as status symbols, even if the owner could not operate them properly.......like many of today's guns. Today they are collected, just like many guns. Still, they are tools.

I have some fancy guns, some plain guns and some ugly guns. I have some high priced firearms and I have some very inexpensive ones. I have some with well known names and some with no so well known names. None of that really matters to me as long as they all work for me and my purpose. No different than my hammers, saws, levels, chisels, etc. Others are free to feel differently and I won't call them tools.

Tool
Tool: (noun)

1.) A guy with a hugely over-inflated ego, who in an attempt to get un-due attention for himself, will act like a jackarse, because, in his deluded state, he will think it's going to make him look cool, or make others want to be like him. The person may even insincerely apologize later on, but only in an attempt to get more attention, or to excuse his blatantly intentional, and unrepentantly tool-ish behavior.

2.) Someone whose ego FAR exceeds his talent, intelligence, and likeability. But, of course, he is clueless regarding that fact. He erroneously thinks he is THE MAN!
 
Still a functional tool !!!

It's true that no all polymer pistols are ugly. Occasionally, there's a good-looking one.
Click to expand...
May be an example of fine craftsmanship but certainly not a work of art. .. :):)

If you turn down the lights, they will all feel and function the same. .... ;)

I still like the fact that even the ones that are artful, still function as intended. I once guided a Pheasant hunting group and one of the fellas was using a limited edition gold engraved DU shotgun. He made the comments that it is still just another shotgun. ..... :rolleyes:

Be Safe !!!
 
I do not think that those words from the screenplay by A.B. Guthrie, Jr, and the additional script by Jack Sher, had anything to do with a philosophical discussion of whether or not a weapon is a tool.

They would likely better be equated with today's phrase "guns don't kill people, people...."

I posted my comments after reading another of those posts about people who prefer steel to polymer.

Today's modern carry pistols are certainly functional. That's why we carry them. But to me, at least, they are not conducive to one of my childhood pleasures--gazing at pictures in Gun Digest, and the Shooter's Bible, Sixguns by Keith, and at guns in museums.

Shane's plated Colt with its ivory grips, and such revolvers as Hickock's brace of engraved Colt's Revolving Belt Pistols of Navy Caliber, are much more appealing to the eye than most modern carry pistols.
 
By that logic I would presume you drive an old beater of a vehicle just in case the idiot who runs a stop sign and hits you broadside won't take out a nice vehicle.

I am an old cop (38+ years) and carry a Mark 3 Browning Hi Power as my plainclothes side arm. It is pleasant to look at, has a genuine history, and I can shoot it quite well. If I should become involved in an incident it will serve me well and hopefully contribute to my survival. If it fulfills that function I will grudgingly let my brother officers keep it for a while. I can always find another tool; not necessarily another life.
 
I’m halfway between. As I reduce my collection, the remaing pistols have been through the hands of master gunsmiths. While I enjoy looking at Bowen’s fanciest work in his book, mine is a Perfected Bisley- there is a beauty to simply feeling correct and working flawlessly.

I’ve had my share of glocks and plastic guns. I had no emotional attachment to them and once used to a good trigger, pulls that felt like pulling a stick through mud were easily parted with. Even the custom race gun Glock- that trigger: even after all the work in the world, bleah. It would be mean to say “well, you can’t polish a turd” but my bullseye .45 made the custom Glock feel 2nd rate.

I’d say a gun is a tool, some tools are better than others, and some are works of art. All of em are weapons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top